Panel Abstracts
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
Panel 1: Neurofeedback: Past, Present and Future
Thomas Budzynski, Ph.D., University of Washington, tbudzyn@gmail.com
Joel Lubar, Ph.D., University of Tennessee, jlubar@utk.edu
M. Barry Sterman, Ph.D., University of California, Los Angeles, msterman@ucla.edu
Abstract
The author received a bachelor's in electrical engineering from the University of Detroit and a Masters and Ph.D. in Psychology from the University of Colorado. He did his internship under Johann Stoyva, Ph.D. at the University of Colorado Medical Center. He began his career as an inertial systems engineer with Honeywell working on the SR-71 Blackbird project at Area 51. After 7 years as an engineer he returned to school to get his masters and Ph.D. in psychology. He did seminal work on biofeedback at the University of Colorado Medical Center with headache, insomnia, anxiety and blood pressure applications. He established a private clinic specializing in biofeedback in 1972. He later taught and did research at the University of West Florida and the University of Washington.
This presentation will be confined to the author's own memories and perspective in what has been a trajectory guided by a desire to use the technology of EEG biofeedback to optimize therapeutic change in the client. Beginning with a successful desensitization of thanataphobia using alpha feedback in 1966 (the first clinical application of neurofeedback?), progressing to the development of the twilight learner (theta EEG sequenced taped affirmations) with John Picchiottino in 1970, and later, the augmentation of neurofeedback with AVS (audio-visual stimulation), the author has utilized a lateralization model of the brain that might explain such change. Along the way, the author presented lectures on biofeedback behind the Iron Curtain in Erfurt, East Germany and for the Department of Psychiatry at Oxford in 1973. As well, pioneers such as Kamiya, Green, Stoyva, Brown, Sterman, Lubar and Cowan pushed the EEG envelope with their own unique efforts as did Ochs and Russell with their development of EEG driven AVS systems. More recently Lubar, Congedo and Sherlin have refined the LORETA to allow real-time feedback of deep cortical activity. With the Collura-Thatcher development of Z-score software a client's EEG parameters can be compared, again in real-time, to normative database values and shown on the computer screen as Z-score deviations from the norm. Before long virtual reality and shutter glass 3-D feedback will take their places in the clinical/research environment. In a small study in 1994, comparing 2-D with shutter glass 3-D videos, the author found increased autonomic arousal with the 3-D presentation. Who knows what form future neurofeedback algorithms and hardware will take as quicker and more effective protocols are created?
References
Budzynski, T., Budzynski, H.K., Maret, K. & Tang, H. (2008). Heart rate variability enhancement through nanotechnology. Journal of Neurotherapy, 11,2.
Budzynski, T., Budzynski, H.K., & Tang, H.Y. (2007). Brain brightening: Restoring the aging mind. In J.R. Evans (Ed.). Handbook of Neurofeedback: Dynamics and Clinical Applications. New York: Haworth Press.
Budzynski, T., Jordy, J., Budzynski, H.K., Tang, H.Y., & Claypoole, K. (1999). Academic performance enhancement with photic stimulation and EDR feedback. Journal of Neurotherapy, 3, 11-21.
Budzynski, T., & Stoyva, J. (1972). Biofeedback techniques in behavior therapy. In N. Birbaumer (Ed.). Die Bewaltingung von Angst. Beitrage der Neuropsychologie zur Angstforschung. Reihe Fortschritte der Klinischen Psychologic, Ed. 4. Munchen, Wien: Verlag, Urban & Schwarzenberg. Republished in D. Shapiro et al. (Eds.). (1973). Biofeedback and Self-Control, Chicago: Aldine-Atherton.
Sherlin, L., Budzynski, T., Budzynski, H.K., Congedo, M., Fischer, M.E., Buchwald, D. (2007). Low-resolution electromagnetic tomography in monozygotic twins discordant for Chronic Fatigue Syndrome. Neuroimage, 34, 1438-1442.
Outline
Past events (30 minutes)
Present events (30 minutes)
Future Possibilities (30 minutes)
Financial Interest: No financial interests.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Panel 2: Understanding Learning Disabilities
Robert Coben, Ph.D., Private Practice, drcoben@gmail.com
Martijn Arns, MSc, Brainclinics Diagnostics, martijn@brainclinics.com
William Hudspeth, Ph.D., Neuropsychometrix, drbill@linkline.com
Abstract
Learning disabilities, specifically dyslexia have an estimated prevalence of 10-15% in school-aged children (Fletcher et al., 2007). There are genetic contributions and brain abnormalities are clearly present in dyslexics (Rosen, 2006). Brain imaging studies of dyslexic children have shown primary defects in left temporoparietal regions with a possible secondary deficit over right frontotemporal areas (Habib & Demonet, 2000).
This presentation will focus on two studies of QEEG findings in groups of dyslexic children, both of which also included neurofeedback based on these data. Study 1 (Arns et al., 2007) included QEEG findings in a group of children with Dyslexia compared to a matched control group, but also the treatment outcome after 20 sessions of QEEG based Neurofeedback as well as the results from long term follow-up. The main findings and Neurofeedback protocols used were based on Coherence measures. The children treated with QEEG based neurofeedback improved specifically on spelling (25%) but no changes on reading skills were found.
Study 2 includes a series of dyslexic children that underwent educational and QEEG analyses. Amplitude and connectivity anomalies were significant with the primary findings being hypoconnectivity over left temporoparietal regions. Coherence training performed over these sites has shown significant improvement in reading and other educational test scores (Coben, 2007).
We will discuss the implications of these disparate findings as they related to differences in types of coherence measurements and their implications for neurofeedback efficacy.
Arns, M., Peters, S., Breteler, R., & Verhoeven, L. (2007). Different brain activation patterns in dyslexic children: Evidence from EEG power and coherence patterns for the double-deficit theory of dyslexia. Journal of Integrative Neuroscience, 6 (1), 175-190.
Coben, R. (2007). Learning Disability: A controlled study of EEG coherence training. Presented at the 15th Annual Conference of the International Society for Neurofeedback and Research, San Diego, California, September, 2007.
Fletcher, J.M., Lyon, G.R., Fuchs, L.S., & Barnes, M.A. (2007). Learning Disabilities: From identification to intervention. New York: Guilford Press.
Habib, M. & Demonet, J.F. (2000. Dyslexia and related learning disorders: Recent advances from brain imaging studies. In J.C. Mazziotta, A.W.Toga, & R.S.J.
Frackowiak (Ed.), Brain Mapping: The Disorders (pp. 459-482). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Rosen,G.D. (2006). The Dyslexic Brain. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Goals/Objectives
Understand the neurophysiological basis of learning disabilities.
Outline
Martijn Arns' presentation will focus on QEEG findings in a group of children with Dyslexia compared to a matched control group, but also the treatment outcome after 20 sessions of QEEG based Neurofeedback as well as the results from long term follow-up. (30 minutes)
Robert Coben's presentation will present QEEG data from a group of dyslexic children demonstrating the neural connectivity anomalies that underlie their processing problems. He will also present data from a neurofeedback study conducted based on this information. (30 minutes)
Bill Hudspeth will discuss similarities and differences between the studies and their findings. Specifically, disparate measures of coherence can provide quite different findings. Implications for neurofeedback efficacy will be discussed. (30 minutes)
Financial Interest: Dr. Hudspeth is the owner of Neuropsychometrix, a company that manufactures and sells QEEG analysis software.
Panel 3: Progress in Biofeedback in Application to Migraine
Siegfried Othmer, Ph.D., The EEG Institute, Siegfried@eeg-info.com
Frank Andrasik, Ph.D., University of West Florida, fandrasik@uwf.edu
Jeffrey Carmen, Ph.D., Private Practice, carmen5272@aol.com
Deborah Stokes, Ph.D., Private Practice, dstokes3@cox.net
Abstract
Biofeedback in application to migraine headache has a long and successful research history. Research has demonstrated superiority of self-regulation modes over pure pharmacological approaches, particularly over a period of years. Nevertheless, several shortcomings in traditional feedback have been observed: 1) difficulty in addressing hormone-related migraines; difficulty with long-established migraine histories that may be trauma-related; and difficulty in aborting an established migraine.
Recent developments promise breakthroughs in all of the areas where traditional biofeedback has fallen short. Firstly, a modification of thermal biofeedback is discussed. In this approach, a non-contact, infrared-based measure is used to reinforce the thermal signature seen at the forehead. Referred to commonly as passive infrared (pIR) feedback, this method has been found successful in aborting ongoing migraines, and in achieving more complete and more consistent resolution of migraine pain than has been typical with conventional thermal training.
A second method using EEG feedback will be discussed. This technique employs a single protocol for all migraine-related phenomena. A combination of reward and inhibit-based training is used. Placement is at T3-T4 in single-channel (bipolar) mode. The reward frequency is tailored to the person for optimum response to the reinforcement. With this approach, ongoing migraines can also commonly be aborted within a training session, or set upon a trajectory of resolution over the next several hours. It has also been successful with hormone-related migraines and with migraines associated with trauma histories. This technique has recently been extended to lower reward frequencies, with beneficial fallout for cases of migraine that had previously been found intractable. Several such case histories will be reviewed in which the opportunity presented itself to compare early methods with the latest approaches in the same individual.
Additionally clinical results will be presented for cases combining all of the abovementioned techniques: traditional thermal training, passive infrared-based training, and EEG feedback.
Finally, the implications for migraine mechanisms will be discussed by the presenters.
Goals/Objectives
Make a judgment with respect to several modes of biofeedback/neurofeedback to reduce migraine
susceptibility
Make a basic distinction between migraine and tension-type headache.
Identify which biobehavioral treatments currently meet criteria for treatment efficacy.
Gain a better understanding of how three biofeedback interventions (EEG biofeedback, thermal biofeedback and passive infrared hemoencephaolgraphy) help reduce the frequency of migraine headaches when used in combination with one another.
Outline
Presentation of the essential clinical approach of individually frequency-optimized protocol-based EEG training using bipolar placement at T3-T4.
Presentation of several representative case histories.
An overview of clinical success with treatment-resistant migraine.
Comparison with other biofeedback options---relative strengths and weaknesses.
Implications for mechanism of remediation.
Discussion of the effects of PIRHEG on management of migraine and other headaches.
Review criteria proposed for determining treatment efficacy with comments on their adequacy and limitations.
Review the extant evidence base, from review panels and meta-analysis.
Explain a recent study with over 30 migraineurs and the results of this study.
Financial Interest: No financial interest.
Friday, August 29, 2008
Panel 4: Fulfilling the Demands of the Scientist-Practitioner Model: A Research Practitioner Network
Lonnie Nelson, PhD, McGuire Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Lonnie.Nelson@va.gov
Joel Lubar, PhD, University of Tennessee, jlubar@utk.edu
David Trudeau, MD, University of Minnesota, trude003@tc.umn.edu
Jay Gattis, PsyD., Private Practice, jaygattis@gmail.com
Abstract
Based on the content of this panel, participants will be able to understand how they can contribute to furthering the ISNR Practice Research Network through knowledge of research topics appropriate to this format and approach. They will better understand the criteria for controlled research studies, the roles of IRB in ensuring human subject safety and rights. The participants will also review basic assessment and diagnostic procedures as well as recognize and utilize appropriate assessment tools based on diagnostic category and will be familiar enough with these tools to utilize them in their own clinical practices. Finally, participants will understand how a web-based database will be used to collect data on subjects/clients to track individual outcomes as a basis for answering research questions related to neurofeedback and how this endeavor will advance our field.
Learning Objectives
Contribute to furthering the ISNR research network through knowledge of topics appropriate to this format.
Understand the criteria for controlled research studies, the roles of IRB in ensuring human subject safety and rights.
Review basic assessment and diagnostic procedures as well as recognize and utilize appropriate assessment tools based on diagnostic category and will be familiar enough with these tools to utilize them in their own clinical practices.
Understand how a web-based database can be used to collect data on subjects/clients to track individual outcomes as a basis for answering research questions related to neurofeedback and how this endeavor will advance our field.
Outline
Lonnie Nelson, PhD will provide an introductory overview to the concept of a Practice Research Network, the kinds of questions that can be addressed through such a framework, as well as those that would still be left unaddressed. (15 minutes)
Joel Lubar, PhD will present on models for clinical and laboratory based studies with examples from published data. (15 minutes)
David Trudeau, MD (15 minutes) will present some basics of research subject protection and ethics -(5 minutes). Unanticipated problems involving risk to subjects - (2 minutes). Incidental findings - (2 minutes) Archiving data for further research analysis - (4 minutes) Period for questions - (2 minutes)
Sarah Prinsloo, PhD will review assessment tools and techniques for standardizing assessment practices for specific disorders. (20 minutes)
Jay Gattis, PsyD will provide a live demonstration of how a Scientist-Practitioner can submit information to an online database and access that information later for individual or group analysis. Followed by an explanation of how such a site is designed and implemented, and how they benefit the Scientist-Practitioner as well as the neurofeedback community as a whole. (20 minutes)
Lonnie Nelson, PhD will provide brief closing remarks and solicit questions. (5 minutes)
Financial Interest: No financial interest.
Poster Abstracts
Friday, August 29, 2008
The SPESA Model for Treatment of Addictive Disorders
Rex Cannon, M.A., University of Tennessee, rcannon2@utk.edu
Introduction
This model is the first of its kind to treat addiction as a brain syndrome and to unify science, research and clinical applications to offer an innovative approach. It is derived from extensive review of research literature and applied neurophysiological and psychological research. It addresses cognitive, perceptual and substance abuse issues while concomitantly addressing neurophysiological elements believed to play an intricate role in addiction and in maintenance of self in a negative context.
Methods
This model was developed based on research studies involving LORETA neurofeedback in the anterior cingulate gyrus; differences between addicts and controls during when completing the Self-Perception and Experiential Schemata Assessment (SPESA) while undergoing EEG recording; picture comparisons between addict and control during EEG recording; differences between addict and control in neural correlations of autobiographical memory; and structural equation modeling of all obtained SPESA scores. The SPESA model is six months in length and consists of 40 sessions of LORETA Neurofeedback training in the right anterior cingulate gyrus; standardized perceptual groups 2 times per week and a substance abuse group one time per week.
Results
Research results indicate structural equation modeling fits the data illustrating that adolescence is a mediator/moderator between childhood and adulthood schemata. Similarly, negative experiences tend to produce negative effects on conceptual and perceptual evaluations of self and self-in-experience. Moreover, the studies indicate that addicted persons perception of self is in essence and negative conditioned stimulus that is hardwired in neural circuitry involving medial frontal, occipital and limbic regions.
Discussion
Current literature suggests that current methods of chemical dependency treatment are inadequate at best and there are few methodologies designed to treat addiction as a brain syndrome. This model affords an innovative approach and may reduce the overwhelming recidivism rates amongst this population. Similarly, this model provides a means to monitor neurophysiological evidence for treatment efficacy and the opportunity to monitor outcomes and individual progress over time. More importantly it affords the opportunity to study, and report neurophysiological, psychological and behavioral data in a coherent, evidence based manner.
The Respiratory Arterial Pressure Wave - The Cardiopulmonary Mechanics Behind the Heart Rate Variability Cycle
Stephen Elliott, BS, Coherence L.L.C., steve.elliott@coherence.com
Introduction
It is generally accepted that baroreceptor reflex activity is the primary mechanism behind the heart rate variability cycle. But what is the baroreceptor responding to? The answer is: "the respiratory arterial pressure wave."
Method
This presentation will present the theory of the respiratory arterial pressure wave including its origin and function in the greater scheme of autonomic nervous system regulation, heart rate variability, and governance of systemic arterial pressure. The respiratory arterial pressure wave is captured (measured) during typical adult breathing and during cardiopulmonary resonance.
Results
Observations of the respiratory arterial pressure wave will be presented during typical adult breathing and during cardiopulmonary resonance and its relationship to baroreceptor activity, heart rate variability, and autonomic nervous system governance made clear.
Conclusion
The respiratory arterial pressure wave is a dramatic physiological phenomenon that results in autonomic nervous system regulation and produces the heart rate variability cycle.
QEEG-Based Neurofeedback for Treatment of Substance Abuse: Current Practices and Preliminary Results
Christopher Fisher, M.A., University of North Texas, chrisfisher@grandecom.net
Eugenia Bodenhamer-Davis, Ph.D., University of North Texas, genie@unt.edu
Background
A recent white paper on EEG biofeedback for substance abuse described the wide variation in EEG patterns that can be found in the population of individuals presenting for substance abuse treatment (Sokhadze, 2008). The wide variation in EEG features seen in this population might suggest that pre-treatment assessment should routinely include qEEG. However, since empirical studies have demonstrated the effectiveness of the Peniston protocol (Peniston & Kulkosky, 1989) for alcoholism and a modified Peniston protocol (Scott & Kaiser, 2005) for polysubstance abuse, it is questionable whether the additional time and cost of a qEEG is justified in terms of better overall treatment outcomes. This study attempted to identify current attitudes and practices of neurofeedback providers who use qEEG-guided neurofeedback in treating substance abuse. The study also gathered 12-month or longer abstinence rates of a sample of inpatients and outpatients treated with qEEG-based neurofeedback along with patient observations from a sample of interdisciplinary staff members from two inpatient addiction treatment centers where qEEG-based neurofeedback has been added to the overall treatment programs. These results were then compared to similar outcome data that has been reported in the literature for Peniston or modified Peniston protocols.
Methods
A brief review of research related to the specific EEG patterns related to individual classes of substances of abuse will be provided. Results of a survey of attitudes and practices of a sample of neurofeedback providers who are using qEEG-based protocols to treat substance abuse will be reported. Finally, an estimate of treatment outcomes for patients treated with qEEG based neurofeedback protocols will be provided through 12-month or longer follow-up abstinence rates from a sampling of both inpatient and outpatient treatment settings, as well as survey results from interdisciplinary treatment staff members from two inpatient addiction treatment centers.
Results
Results of 12-month-plus abstinence rates, addiction treatment staff observations of inpatient behavior changes, and treatment protocol configurations of neurofeedback providers using qEEG as a basis for their treatment protocols for substance abuse will be reported and compared with available data from the literature with results reported for treatment outcomes using Peniston or modified Peniston protocols.
Conclusions
Discussion will focus on how data derived from this investigation of current practices and outcome results compare with results from Peniston and modified Peniston protocols and whether this evidence supports using qEEG in neurofeedback treatment of substance abuse.
The Incidence of EEG Phenotypes in ADHD and Normal Groups
Jay Gunkelman, QEEGT, Q-Pro Worldwide, qeegjay@sbcglobal.net
Martijn Arns, Brainclinics Diagnostics, martijn@brainclinics.com
Abstract
The incidence of the EEG phenotypes described in prior studies is described in both ADHD subjects and controls. The phenotypes are present in both groups with the degree of divergence from normal being greater for the clinical population than the normal controls. The frontal slow phenotype, the slow alpha frequency phenotype, Mu, and the low voltage phenotypes all loaded more strongly into the clinical grouping than the normal population. The incidence of the normal EEG phenotype is nearly 25% in the controls, and only 10% in the AD/HD population. These relationships are graphed below:
A Case Series Using Discriminant Analysis for MTBI: Type 1 and Type 2 Error Rates in Clinical Practice
Jay Gunkelman, QEEGT, Q-Pro Worldwide, qeegjay@sbcglobal.net
Introduction
Prior studies using discriminants report a low false positive rate, and a reasonable low false negative rate using the MTBI discriminant (Thatcher, et al.). Others previously reported a 30% false negative and over 50% false positive rate using the discriminant (K. Thornton). This case series attempts to replicate one of these prior reported outcomes.
Method
A case series of EEGs from a multi-site practice group with a heterogeneous referral population mix was analyzed with the NeuroGuide MTBI discriminant over approximately a 6 week period in early 2008. The client histories were well documented with respect to the presence or absence of traumatic brain injury, and severity of traumatic incidents where they were observed. The MTBI discriminant had cases which were correctly identified, as well as cases where there was either a false positive error (told of head injury when there was none) or false negative error (told of absence of MTBI in the presence of demonstrable brain injury from a trauma). These data are provided as a series of discriminant file images with the client diagnosis also displayed.
Results
The images of the discriminant output for the known false negative (4) and false positive (20) cases are included for completeness, and so that any further patterns may be seen within the divergent data. The false negative rate was intermediate between the two prior studies, at 25% (20% reported by Thatcher, and 30% by Thornton), and with a replication of the approximately 50% rate of false positive identification using the MTBI discriminant with this mixed clinical population.
Discussion
The data collected in this open case series provides replication of previously reported rates of type one and type two error, generally replicating the findings of Kirtley Thornton of higher than generally acceptable rates of false positive identification for the clinical application of this software to the general population for screening purposes. The false negative rate was intermediate between the two previously reported rates.
Key Words: Discriminant, MTBI, false positive, false negative
Effective Heart Rate Variability Biofeedback Alters the Amplitude of Brainwaves at the Frontal Lobes More Than the Cranial Vertex
Nicholas Hansen, Mont Harmon Junior High, Price, Utah
Abstract
This is an exploratory study to assess the effects of heart rate variability (HRV) biofeedback on brainwave patterns.
Method
Each subject had electroencephalogram (EEG) leads placed on their head on the central forehead (FZ) and cranial vertex sites (CZ), each referenced to the left ear. After a three minute baseline, the subject used the Stresseraser HRV biofeedback device to time their breaths. They continued to breathe based on this feedback for ten minutes, and then they breathed without feedback for three more minutes. The effect of this breathing was monitored on the EEG.
Results
Effective HRV feedback reduced EEG amplitude in the delta, theta, high beta, and gamma ranges over the frontal lobes, and delta and high beta ranges over the cranial vertex. There was more change over the frontal lobes than over the cranial vertex. There was more reduction in amplitude of low-frequency waves (delta, theta, and alpha) than the faster waves (gamma, beta, and SMR). Ineffective computer feedback did not change the amplitude of the brain waves at the cranial vertex or the frontal lobes.
Discussion
It appears that HRV biofeedback reduces the amplitude of slower frequency brainwaves over the frontal lobes; however, some of the subjects appeared to have relatively high amplitudes of these brainwaves frontally, so it is also possible that HRV biofeedback normalizes brainwave distribution. Further research should clarify this issue.
A Crossover Comparison Study of Neurofeedback Training in the Treatment of Anxiety Behaviors
Cynthia Kerson, PhD crkerson@pacbell.net
Richard Sherman, PhD, Gerald Kozlowski, PhD
University of Natural Medicine
Background: Since there is often comorbidity of depression and anxiety this study looked at the presence of frontal lobe alpha asymmetry in people who presented with generalized anxiety behaviors because this pattern has been shown in studies of depressives.
Methods: Seven people have completed the study to date. Feedback included 6 sessions of ear lobe temperature biofeedback (ELTB) as a crossover control and neurofeedback (NF) which lowered alpha amplitude and then raised symmetry to criteria (10% reduction of alpha amplitude and 15% increase in symmetry). The sessions took place 2 times a week and lasted 30 minutes each. The State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) was used to assess trends of anxious behaviors at pre- and post-QEEG administration, after the 6 ELTB control sessions and at a 6-month follow-up interview. The subjects also filled a Daily Anxiety Inventory (DAI) at home, which included 12 questions related to affective state.
Results: Approximately 30% of those who were interviewed for the study presented with the frontal lobe alpha asymmetry brain wave pattern. The results of the STAI were first evaluated using a Friedman nonparametric one way analysis of variance which showed that both the state and trait conditions had significant overall differences between the retests (p = 0.024, p = 0.001 respectively). Individual Wilcoxon nonparametric tests showed that changes in state and trait anxiety scores between the initial baseline and post ELTB (the control condition) were not significant while decreases in both state and trait scores from post ELTB to post EEG training (the experimental condition) and follow-up were significant. Of the seven people who have completed the study to date, all were able to reach criteria in the two phases of NF training (mean number of sessions were 10.75 for amplitude reduction and 15.625 for symmetry).
Conclusions: The analysis of the above eight variables pre, after ELTB, post and 6-month follow-up of both state and trait STAI scores indicated a robust positive change from pre-QEEG to post-QEEG and 6-month follow-up. These results suggest that the NF training is an effective therapeutic tool for reduction of generalized anxiety behaviors in this population.
The EEG Asymmetry Analysis of the Left and Right Brain Activities from Simple versus Complex Arithmetic Learning
Hyungkyu Alex Kwon, Ph.D., Kyusgsung University, alexhkwon@gmail.com
Jangsik Cho, Ph.D., Eunjung Lee, M.S.
Abstract
Repeated practice of simple arithmetic such as addition, subtraction, and multiplication has been widely used for effective math education. Brain activity patterns during simple and complex arithmetic calculation have been explored by several research groups using magnetic resonance images (MRI) and functional magnetic resonance images (fMRI), and some have reported that the balanced whole brain (both left and right brain) activities during simple arithmetic in contrast to the predominant left brain activities during complex arithmetic.
In this work, we have identified the characteristic brainwaves and asymmetric activation patterns of the left and right brain during the process of simple and complex arithmetic by measuring theta, alpha SMR, and beta brainwaves of 24 subjects from the location FP1 (left brain) and FP2 (right brain) using EEG. Simple statistics analysis showed the significantly different beta brainwave activities from the left brain during complex arithmetic compared to simple arithmetic process, and through the asymmetry analysis of the left and right brain activities, more unbalanced brain activation during complex calculation, i.e. specifically higher SMR and beta brainwaves in the left brain more than right brain was identified, which is consistent with the previous work by Kawashima and Delazer et al. using fMRI.
CES Utilized to Reduce Stress in a County Sheriff's Officer Population
Ronald Mellen, Ph.D., Jacksonville State University, hobbits6@bellsouth.net
Abstract
Sheriff Patrol and Jail Security Officer populations work in difficult and at times dangerous environments. Those variables along with low pay scales can contribute to increased levels of stress, lower job performance and increased interpersonal problems. CES was utilized as a stress reducing treatment variable in the present study. Positive changes were found on pre- post-Brief Symptom Inventory measures of depression, anxiety, hostility, and the survey's other sub-scales.
References
Biological Correlates of Criminal Behavior, accepted for publication in Correction Compendium. Publication date is to be announced. The Correction Compendium is a peer-reviewed journal of the American Correctional Association.
Recidivism Rates in a Rural Southern County Jail. The Review of the Literature was completed and the data was collected during the spring of 2007. The data is presently being analyzed. While a substantial amount of recidivism research has been collected on state and federal inmates, little exists on county jail recidivism rates.
A Survey of Sex Offender Treatment Programs in the Southern States Correctional Association's Departments of Correction: An exploratory study. Southern Concourse, with co-author F. Celeste Smith. January, 2007.
Inmates with Methamphetamine Addictions. Southern Concourse, the journal of the Southern States Correctional Association, Co-author Stephanie Mitchell. Winter 2006.
Neurotransmitters and the Impulsively Violent Inmate. Southern Concourse, with co-author Dr. Robert C. Evans. Fall 2005.
qEEG and Neurofeedback Therapy as Potential Assessment and Treatment Modalities in the Correctional Setting. Correctional Psychologist, Co-author Nancy B. Mellen. July 2005
Super Achievers: What's Different About Them?
Kanak Panday, Master's Degree, Gunjan Human Karigar Pvt. Ltd., kanakpanday@gmail.com
Prachi Parashar Panday, Gunjan Human Karigar Pvt., Ltd., Prachi@humankarigar.com
Abstract
While working with many young achievers as corporate clients one of the authors noticed that a significant number had poor academic records, had difficulty focusing on issues, were snappy in decision making, and temperamental by nature. Most of them are idea masters but had very poor execution and poor people skills. The question, "What made them fast track achievers?" generated the interest in conducting the study.
The paper describes an ongoing study that is being conducted to determine the traits of super achievers in India. A part of the study has been conducted and the findings reveal important attributes of super achievers. The participants were selected from different sectors-corporate, manufacturing, artists, retail, etc. The participants were chosen randomly from New Delhi and Mumbai in India. At the time of publication, five participants have participated in this study. The authors' aim to eventually include approximately 20 participants.
The participants belong to the super achievers category and are from different sectors. Most of them are very renowned and page 3 personalities; they have risen from a very mediocre background in a short period of time. Through this study, authors aim to get some pattern of functioning of executive area that is frontal, specially aiming to capture the positive side of hyper brain activities, stress coping strategies, so they can be developed as a combination of a neurofeedback training protocol along with behavioral training to train aspirant super achievers.
A brief initial discussion was done with the participants to gain information about their backgrounds and to determine the factors that they contribute to their success. This was followed by a detailed neuro-assessment using 2-channel EEG while doing various executive tasks, Continuous Performance Test (CPT) through BrainTrain and psycho-physiological stress profiling (Nexus -10, a Wireless Physiological Instrument was used). This was followed by a personality analysis session in which 16 PF was used as the instrument. After the analysis, the authors found that 80% were hyper on Continuous Performance Test (CPT); BrainTrain software was used. They are great conceptualizers; however, poor executers. They have great visualization power.
Integrating Neurofeedback and Talk Therapy in the Treatment of Mothers and Their Special Needs Sons
Jacqueline Ciccio Parsons, M.Ed., St. Mary's University, jpparsons@sbcglobal.net
Randall Lyle, Ph.D., St. Mary's University, rlyle@randallrlylephd.com
Introduction
Integrating neurofeedback and talk therapy is done by many therapists in the field of neurotherapy, but there are few cases supporting the use of the 2 modalities together. The integration of neurofeedback and talk therapy, according to Sebern Fisher, allows the therapist the privilege of being at the intersection where brain becomes mind. Talk therapy and neurofeedback maximizes each modalities treatment effects.
Method
This poster presentation examines two case studies in which both participants were treated with talk therapy and neurofeedback. The first case study reports on a mother and her 14 year old son diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome. The second case study is on a mother and her 10 year old son with dyslexia and generalized anxiety disorder. Both mothers in the case studies were extremely anxious and controlling of their special needs sons. Prior to each neurofeedback session, talk therapy took place between client and therapist.
Results
All participants in the two case studies improved. The anxiety in both mothers decreased dramatically. The 14 year old male with Asperger's Syndrome calmed down significantly and began to notice and act on social cues. The 10 year old male with dyslexia was able to control his anxiety, increased his reading fluency and comprehension, and passed the required reading state test required of third graders in Texas and his grades went from failing to A's & B's. Both mothers learned to allow their sons to take risks and encounter the natural consequences of their sons' actions. Both relationships between mother and sons improved. When other siblings were in the family, relationships improved between siblings and client.
Conclusion
It seems likely that the integration of talk therapy and neurofeedback training is an effective treatment in both the mothers and their sons with special needs. Both mothers and sons improved with the combination of modalities, as did family relationships.
An Examination of Cranial Electrotherapy Stimulation (CES) on Cortisol Levels and State/Trait Anxiety Scores in the Violent Perpetrator and Victim Population
Julie Strentzsch, Master of Counseling., St. Mary's University, jstrentzsch@satx.rr.com
Randall Lyle, Ph.D., St. Mary's University, rlyle@randallrlylephd.com
Abstract
When our bodies learn to overreact to stress, it can move into anxiety. Anxiety is often linked or is co-morbid with aggression. As an individual links the anxiety and anger responses together, it becomes difficult to separate the two. Individuals linking the anxiety state with aggression can begin to exhibit violent behaviors; we can altar these behaviors because our brains have the ability to change. The belief is that when individuals feel less anxious they create space to process their violent and aggressive responses.
This study uses cranial electrotherapy stimulation in a three week protocol to reduce and help the client to understand the biological responses of anxiety in the perpetrator/victim population. Participants were randomly assigned between a sham unit and a working CES unit. The researcher and the participant did not know who received a working CES unit until the completion of their protocol treatment. Pre and post measures of cortisol levels and the state/trait anxiety test will be given to all participants. For the poster presentation the researcher will discuss the basics of cranial electrotherapy stimulation (CES), the biological process of anxiety and aggression to the brain, the double blind research process, the researcher's results and how they can be translated to clinical practice.
4-Channel Z-Score Neurofeedback-A Single Case Study
Nancy Wigton, M.A., Applied Neurotherapy Center, nwig@cox.net
Background
At the 2006 ISNR conference, a new Neurofeedback technique was made available. This new technique is called "Z-Score Neurofeedback" and was also made available in a new 4-channel platform. Up to that time, the majority of Neurofeedback hardware platforms commonly in use were 2-channel units. Z-Score Neurofeedback is a system that combines real-time Neurofeedback training, the NeuroGuide normative database analysis, and new computational methods. Since the release of the new hardware and software, which is viewed by some to be experimental, the unanswered question has been "does it work"? And if it does work, "does it work better" than what we have previously had available? While there are some longer-term, multi-subject research projects that are planned and/or underway, to-date none have been published or presented. Therefore, single case, or small group studies, along with anecdotal clinician experience is all that is currently available to evaluate these new techniques.
This is one such single-case study. In this study, pre-post QEEG and outcome measure data are presented. This case is presented in hopes of adding to our field's collective knowledge and provides data to better answer the "does it work" questions. Method: The BrainMaster "Atlantis I" hardware platform was used to conduct 4-Channel Z-Score Neurofeedback applying the proprietary "Percent Z-OK" based protocols. QEEG and outcome measure data (clinical interview and IVA CPT) was collected prior to starting Neurofeedback, after 25 Neurofeedback sessions, and will again be collected after an estimated 50 Neurofeedback sessions.
Results
To-date the client has responded well to the 4-channel Z-Score Neurofeedback. After 25 Neurofeedback sessions the client was no longer on medications and reported improved overall functioning. The post-QEEG data showed significant improvements in the Amplitude, Asymmetry, Coherence and Phase measures. The post-IVA assessment showed dramatic improvements. While the pre-NF IVA overall scale scores ranged between 0 to 54 (extremely impaired), with the main full-scale scores being 29 and 0; the post-25 NF IVA overall scale scores range between 78 to 111 (little to no impairment), with the main full-scale scores being 94 and 96. At the time of the writing of this abstract, data was only available for the post-25 sessions; further data will be presented after the completion of the case, which is expected to be approximately 40-50 sessions.
Cautions and Considerations
While this case, with multiple amplitude and connectivity measure abnormalities, was well suited for an approach using 4-channels with the Percent Z-OK protocol which trained all Z-score measures, it is important to realize that when using z-score training, one size does not fit all. With the availability to select which z-score measures can be trained (only absolute values, or only coherence values, etc) one must use their clinical judgment to assess how many channels to use, what z-score measures to train, or even if generic amplitude training may be a better approach than z-score training. Further, since the z-score approach can be very simple to set up and use, a clinician should be cognizant of a potential for becoming clinically complacent towards protocol development. Just because a method can be as simple as driving a car with an automatic transmission, does not mean that the clinician can then ignore how the gear system works.
Conclusion
This case clearly demonstrates that 4-channel Z-Score Neurofeedback does "work." As to the question of "does it work better", it appears that the answer is also "yes". Therefore, given the degree of success in this case, the 4-channel Z-Score Neurofeedback method merits further research and study to better understand this new approach to Neurofeedback.
Quantitative Electroencephalograph Effects as a Result of Single Session Respiratory Sinus Arrhythmia Feedback in an Anxiety Population
Sarah Wyckoff, M.A., Southwest College of Naturopathic Medicine, wyckoffsarah@yahoo.com
Leslie Sherlin, Ph.D., NovaTech EEG, lesliesherlin@mac.com
Objective
Previous investigations of electroencephalographs during relaxation has identified increases in slow wave (theta and alpha) band power, correlations between increased levels of alpha activity with lower levels of anxiety, and autonomic changes characterized by decreased sympathetic activity. This study was carried out to determine the impact of a respiratory sinus arrhythmia (RSA) biofeedback device on Quantitative EEG.
Methods
Participants were 43 individuals reporting stress levels at least one standard deviation above the mean on the Perceived Stress Inventory who were randomly assigned into either a control (concentration device) or experimental group (RSA biofeedback: StressEraser). Participants in both groups were novices given 15-minute training on how to use the devices. The study recorded 19 channel EEG under baseline, stressor task, intervention, post baseline and repeated stressor conditions. For each group QEEG analyses were computed.
Results
Ratios of alpha/beta and to a lesser degree theta/beta increased to a significant level in sites O1 and O2 following RSA feedback. QEEG features of power and relative power exhibited trends worthy of future investigation in a larger sample. There were no significant differences in the concentration only control device group.
Conclusions
These findings suggest that RSA feedback may decrease arousal in areas critical to the experience of stress and anxiety and provides physiological evidence of changes produced by RSA feedback.
Keywords: Respiratory sinus arrhythmia; QEEG; anxiety; biofeedback
QEEG Brainwave Amplitude and Coherence Values as Predictors of Cognitive Improvement to Neurofeedback after Moderate to Severe Acquired Brain Injury
Victor Zelek, Ph.D., Northeast Center for Special Care, victorzelek@msn.com
Introduction
Although neurofeedback has been shown to be an effective treatment modality for a variety of psycho-cognitive disorders, its application for patients with ABI (acquired brain injury) has been sparse and mostly limited to mild TBI (traumatic brain injury). Lengthy treatments, poor compliance and inconsistent clinical response have been cited among the reasons. The current prospective study attempted to answer the following questions: 1. Will neurofeedback lead to cognitive improvement and QEEG normalization in patients with moderate to severe ABI? 2. Which QEEG parameters will correlate with the cognitive gains of treatment? 3. Which QEEG parameters at baseline will be most predictive of cognitive improvement following neurofeedback?
Methods
Ten patients with moderate to severe brain injury (defined as duration of unconsciousness more than 30 minutes and 24 hours, respectively) from an inpatient brain injury rehabilitation facility participated in the study. Their cognitive abilities were evaluated with RBANS (Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status) given before and after neurofeedback treatment. Neurofeedback was given 2-3 times a week for the total of 30 sessions and included both power and coherence training. All subjects had QEEG analyses done before and after treatment. Electrophysiological improvement was measured by the normalization of brainwave power and coherence values that were abnormal before the treatment.
Conclusion
In all 10 patients RBANS measures were found to be significantly improved following neurofeedback treatment. Mean RBANS score before treatment was 1.70 (SD=1.34) and after treatment it was 12.30 (SD=10.84); F(1,9)=11.4, p<0.01. In addition, all subjects showed significant improvement in their brainwave power and coherence values. Initial abnormalities of brainwave coherence showed greater predictive value of cognitive improvement than abnormalities of brainwave power in this sample. The present study shows that patients who are survivors of moderate to severe brain injury that occurred 5 to 56 months ago can make significant cognitive gains in response to neurofeedback treatment.